[1.3.0] Kerbalism v1.2.9

Recommended Posts

@seregheru What about I do something like this, to emulate the observed failure rate curve. Then I just scale aging using that. What you think?

Edited by ShotgunNinja
modified function
Share on other sites

@ShotgunNinja [Ah, inverted plot in edit is more clear] Approximating the bathtub function still leaves you the survival function to calculate and the integral to do. The cumulative distribution is the important one, as that's the one that gives you the lifetime value. That will start at zero and grow towards 1. The gradient is always non-negative. I'm not totally sure on the exact shape in between - I think its a curve that starts steep, curves off and then straightens slightly.... but I'd need to put some numbers in a spreadsheet to be sure.

Edited by seregheru
Share on other sites

@seregheru That curve will come out of the fact that 'age' is both the input and the output of that function. I'm just trying to guess an approximation. I don't want to compute CDFs, this will be executed for hundreds of parts at 60hz (or more).

I'm doing some experiments and they look promising.

Share on other sites

Calculating the CDF means you DON'T calculate over and over at 60Hz. Calculating at every time step is much, much simpler but obviously has a huge performance penalty. Calculating the CDF lets you set the lifetime once and then just test "(age>lifetime)" in each step. You are already doing this - the code you have is exactly what you would get if you calculated then inverted the CDF for a uniform probability density function. Age is not on both axes of the CDF. The x-axis is the age and the y-axis is the probability of failure before that time. You generate the y-axis value from random number and then read across to the curve and down to the lifetime on the x-axis.

Share on other sites

@seregheru Sorry what I mean is this:

curve(k): that function i posted above
every step:
age += elapsed_seconds * curve(age)

this reduce aging in the middle of lifetime, that was the objective

the cost is trivial, as there is only 1 MUL, 3 ADD and 3 SELECT instructions here under the hood

Share on other sites

@ShotgunNinja That looks like a pretty neat solution. You'd lose the long tail of rare unexpectedly long-lived parts, but that's possibly a good thing. I can't think of a reason why it won't work. You would have to experiment to see how sudden the onset of wear-out failures feels, but you could always add an extra point or two to the curve to soften it up. Looks promising anyway - would be interested to see how it plays.

Share on other sites

Loving the mod, just a few things I would like to see:

-Have food/oxygen be consumed from lower stages first. Currently I believe it averages so I have to manually transfer the resources to the upper stage from the stage I'm discarding, and I've had a few close calls on missions because its easy to forget the snacks/air.

-Being able to hide vessels on the main vessel tab would be nice. I know I can make groups and hide them that way, but I think it would be nice to have two tabs, one labeled "Current" and one labeled "All", which would allow you to click 'hide' on vessels you don't care about and it'll stay out of the 'current' tab.

-When out of resources, say food, it would be neat if the text would say "Jeb thinks he can go x more hours without food" (This may be in already but I haven't gone more then a day without food )

-capsule and heat shield malfunctions/defects: Capsules could leak oxygen and heat-shields could chip/crack, causing it to overheat x% faster. Could happen not by chance but if impacted/ x amount of G's experienced for x amount of time.

-Parts required for some malfunctions? Just a thought, but what if certain fixes require one 'part' unit? parts could be lightweight and could be able to be stored as the current consumables are, in capsules and standalone. I don't know its a problem necessarily but currently if you have an engineer your craft is perfect as long as he's fed, to me it follows the logic of this mod to need parts for some fixes.

Would love to hear thoughts/opinions from people on these. Even if none of this remotely happens this is still a fantastic mod and I can't wait to see what new content gets released.

Question: does shielding not only help against radiation, but also heat? because If it doesn't that would be a fantastic feature to include.

Also, does radiation stack for each Kerbal over the course of the game? If so is there a way to view how many rads they've picked up? and If not that'd be pretty neat too.

Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Squelch7 said:

The capsules all come with a significant amount of oxygen and scrubbers. It sounds like you don't have ModuleManager installed. (Several of us have fallen for that.)

ahhh thank you for the tip..
I have module manager installed, but it was not the latest version so maybe that is my problem. I will try to update module manager and maybe remove some mods to check if there is some kind of conflict and see how it goes.

Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Peder said:

ahhh thank you for the tip..
I have module manager installed, but it was not the latest version so maybe that is my problem. I will try to update module manager and maybe remove some mods to check if there is some kind of conflict and see how it goes.

If you are running KSP 1.1.2, you need to have Module Manager 2.6.24 or later (current is 2.6.24) and remove any older versions.  Earlier versions of Module Manager under KSP 1.1.2 will fail to run any Module Manager scripts.

Share on other sites

Running KSP 1.1.2 and Kerbalism 0.9.9.4. I have a ship design with two antennas on a probe core, with solar panels, and then that covered in a Procedural Fairings fairing, and then two antennas on the side of the rocket outside the fairing. The flight goes fine until I jettison the stage with the external antennas, then Kerbalism says "No antenna" and I lose control of the ship, even though the two other antennas are out in the open, with the fairing jettisoned. Am I doing something wrong? Same behaviour when using a stock fairing.

Edited by JacobT11
Share on other sites

I can't tell you how excited I am by your plans to make Kerbalism a sort of open framework for life support systems of almost any description! I'm really impressed by how you listened to people complaining that this mod wasn't tweakable enough, and instead of getting annoyed you went the extra mile (and then some!) to design a system that might just make EVERYONE happy. I'm so impressed by what you've revealed of your plans, and I can't wait to get my hands on the final product!

Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JacobT11 said:

Running KSP 1.1.2 and Kerbalism 0.9.9.4. I have a ship design with two antennas on a probe core, with solar panels, and then that covered in a Procedural Fairings fairing, and then two antennas on the side of the rocket outside the fairing. The flight goes fine until I jettison the stage with the external antennas, then Kerbalism says "No antenna" and I lose control of the ship, even though the two other antennas are out in the open, with the fairing jettisoned. Am I doing something wrong? Same behaviour when using a stock fairing.

Can you post a screen of this ship?

Share on other sites

I'm just blown away by this mod! I've been waiting for something like this for a long time. You've obviously have put a lot of thought and effort into the mod. I truly believe this should be incorporated into KSP as a new game option.

Is there a way of mapping the radiation storms/belts? (maybe with a SCANsat type system?)

Edited by vontreigo
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, vontreigo said:

Is there a way of mapping the radiation storms/belts? (maybe with a SCANsat type system?)

This would be a fun addition. I use Scan Sat aswell

Share on other sites

Is there a way to disable malfunctions?  I like the idea in theory, but trying to set up a satellite network is basically impossible when they all start breaking during a time-warp to Minmus.

Share on other sites

@ShotgunNinja What if instead of doing occasional spot checks for malfunctions you made a script that semi - randomizes MTBF for each part at launch, or assembly, and just breaks it at MTBF +/- 10% time?

Another thing: Could we use KAS&KIS to replace faulty parts on craft in orbit?

Will Kerbalism accept that as a functional part then?

Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Brofessional said:

Is there a way to disable malfunctions?  I like the idea in theory, but trying to set up a satellite network is basically impossible when they all start breaking during a time-warp to Minmus.

You can disable the warning from the UI, for malfunctions just wait for the next version.

Share on other sites

@ShotgunNinja, first of all, your development of this mod has been great and it's quickly looking like it'll become an absolutely amazing mod.

If you need any help coming up with realistic LS values, I'd highly recommend looking at the TAC LS configs for stock and RO, since they also have "realistic" rates scaled to kerbals and humans respectively.  As well, NASA/CR—2004–208941 provides a very comprehensive baseline for human values.

I've noticed that SAS stays on during a control blackout, but cannot be toggled.  I'm a huge fan of this feature, especially because it means that things like fixed directional antennas (as we had previously discussed here) could be implemented without requiring a dedicated autopilot; you'd just need to have an option to "control from here" on antenna parts and use SAS to point towards target.

Would it be possible to, in a future version, extend this functionality (or, at least, the circumventing of the signal block) to actual autopilots like kOS, RT's flight computer, and MechJeb?  That way we could perform things like automated Mun landings on the far side, which currently is impossible.

Finally, is there ever any plan to allow for multiple star systems?  I'd really like to have them in my game, and while Kerbalism's finally at a state with .9.5 where I'd be happy giving up more stars for your mod, I'd rather not have to.

EDIT:  Forgot to ask, but under the .cfg-based LS system, would there be an eventual possibility of allowing for the buildup of toxic resources to kill the crew (i.e., when resource is full, crew dies, instead of when resource is depleted, crew dies)?  That way, CO2 poisoning could be added using your mod's framework, which is something I've always wanted in a LS mod.

Edited by Charlie_Zulu
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nansuchao said:

Can you post a screen of this ship?

I didn't save the ship I was having issues with, so I rebuilt it, now I'm having an issue where even though there's antennas on the vehicle, it still tells me "No antenna" in the Kerbalism window.

Share on other sites

@Joe12473 New kind of malfunctions are on the todo list. Also I intend to make resource consumption respect stacks and flow in future. Radiation is reset when your Kerbal is debriefed at the space center.

@JacobT11 I'll investigate Don't know what may be causing that. (BTW: do you have ModuleManager i assume?)

@vontreigo Rendering the magnetopause and the belts on tracking view is going to happen sooner or later. I want to give the user some visual feedback, and I also want to make the shapes more realistic.

@Brofessional Wait a few days and you'll be able to disable them in next version.

@11of10  I rebalanced reliability quite a bit for 0.9.9.5: much lower malfunction rates, a new 'aging' curve that prefer failure at the start and end of lifetime instead of in the middle, engineers can inspect components to give a clue on its state, and highlightings of broken parts.

@Charlie_Zulu The realism profile is delayed. I want to see what people make of the new system first. Thanks for the suggestion on TAC-LS consumption rates.

Multiple stars is hard: you need to create a ModuleDeployablePanel alternative that support an arbitrary set of stars. Then I have to generalize everything sun-related. Not going to happen soon, but it may.

Some form of autopilot or even directional antennas are not on the todo list for now. The reason is that the user will be able to disable Signal and so if he wants those features he can use RemoteTech. But that directional antennas idea is cool and I'll keep that in mind.

In next version (possibly):
Shielding mass reduced to 1 ton/unit
Food mass reduced to 10kg/unit
Oxygen mass reduced to 4kg/unit
Rebalanced part masses and costs

Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@JacobT11 I'll investigate Don't know what may be causing that. (BTW: do you have ModuleManager i assume?)

Yeah ModuleManager 2.6.24. Do you want the craft file for it?

Edited by JacobT11
Share on other sites

@JacobT11 I am unable to reproduce the issue. Please send me both the savegame and the log file if you can.

Spoiler

Edited by ShotgunNinja
more images
Share on other sites

Hiya, is there any plans to be able to use Kerbalism with Remote Tech? the way the Signals work is good, but it needs remote tech layout, so you can see in the map, which satellites are linked and the line of sight, making communication networks, is one the best thing with remote tech and Kerbalism needs :-)

Share on other sites

I'm posting this here as maybe it can help someone with my same problem.
A short while ago @Fraz86 posted this ModuleManager patch for CryoTanks mod to reduce EC requirements for zero boil off tanks:

```// Power requirements for ZBO (zero boil off) tanks cut to 25%
@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCryoTank]]:AFTER[CryoTanks]:NEEDS[CryoTanks]
{
@MODULE[ModuleCryoTank]
{
@CoolingCost *= 0.25
}
}```

It won't work for me, ModuleManager won't patch the configs. I'm not ModuleManager expert, but in file

` CryoTanksFuelTankSwitcher.cfg`

in the directory

`Gamedata\CryoTanks\Patches`

which applies a patch for zero boil off tanks setting their EC consumption to 0,08 EC/second, there's this line:

`@PART[*]:HAS[@RESOURCE[LiquidFuel],@RESOURCE[Oxidizer],!MODULE[InterstellarFuelSwitch],!MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX],!MODULE[ModuleEngines],!MODULE[FSfuelSwitch]]:NEEDS[!modularFuelTanks&!RealFuels]:FOR[zzz_CryoTanks]`

that in my understanding applies the patch after practically anything else ( :FOR[zzz_CryoTanks] ).
I solved substitutng the first line of code in @Fraz86's proposed patch with this one:

`@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCryoTank]]:FOR[zzzzz_Kerbalism]`

This way the patch gets applied after CryoTanksFuelTankSwitcher.cfg and it works. But, as I said above, since I know about nothing about ModuleManager this may not be the correct syntax. Use at your own risk.
Of course also something like this will work:

`@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCryoTank]]:FINAL`

but perhaps the first solution is better.